Intro to Building Contract Administration – Chapter 1: The Project group

This new series of the Contract Administration Practice Neighborhood will follow the details covered in CSI’s Building Contract Administration Practice Guide. While the content material might be focused towards pros new to the practice, we invite experienced pros to please join in and supply your knowledge as we lay a foundation for a strong future in the business.

From: CSIConstruction

Secret Bush Administration Memorandum

New York Instances Reveals Bush Administration’s Behind the Scenes Communications on the War in Iraq

The following link will take you to the complete write-up, which I’ve teased below, that appears in today’s New York Instances, purporting to expose a secret Bush administration memorandum about the Iraq war: Text of the National Safety Adviser’s Memorandum on the Political Circumstance in Iraq – New York Times: Published: November 29, 2006

Following is the beginning of a Nov. eight memorandum ready for cabinet-level officials by Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, and his aides on the National Safety Council. The five-page document, classified secret, was study and transcribed by The New York Instances.

We returned from Iraq convinced we need to establish if Prime Minister Maliki is both prepared and capable to rise above the sectarian agendas being promoted by other folks. Do we and Prime Minister Maliki share the exact same vision for Iraq? If so, is he in a position to curb those who seek Shia hegemony or the reassertion of Sunni energy? The answers to these concerns are key in figuring out whether or not we have the right technique in Iraq.
You can go to the above link to study the full post. It is fascinating.

Bush’s Huge Mistake

To me, this secret memorandum reveals why the Bush administration has failed miserably in explaining the Iraq war to the American people. The memorandum reveals an truthful, sophisticated assessment of the circumstance in Iraq. This is the type of analysis I have been attempting to conduct on my blog. It is also the type of thinking my commenters have been positing, from the left and appropriate. I believe the American folks are adult enough, and sophisticated adequate, to hear these types of thoughts and considerations.

Rather of speaking the truth, as is the mission of this blog, the President continues to pronounce his speaking points, like “Stay the course,” “We’re fighting for freedom,” and “We guarantee not to withdraw till the mission is achieved.”

I don’t discount the legitimate require for slogans, propaganda, continued repetition, and so on. Just simply because the Nazis used propaganda successfully, and the Soviet Union, and North Korea et al, doesn’t mean it isn’t a excellent tool for democracy also. We employed it successfully in this country in the course of WWII. I’m not opposed to it, when it’s for a great cause.

On the other hand, I do think the American individuals are much more mature than politicians imagine. Yes, you can win them more than with the hateful mantras of the left—which is exactly what happened in the last election. The reason these mantras worked, even though, was that voters had no option. Bush has never explained to Americans, as mature adults, what is truly going on in the world, and specially in Iraq. Bush has never been an articulate champion of conservative values.

Bush’s Theory of Politics

Bush, like a lot of other politicians, believes that the principal function of a president is to be a diplomat. Diplomats are tight-lipped. They are aware of each and every word they speak they offend no one particular they are eternally optimistic at the worst they are guarded. They reveal practically nothing when they open their mouths.

Bush is the supreme diplomat. He does this with the American folks as well. He is ultra-cautious about what he says, for example, about Iraq.

Beyond getting a diplomat, Bush tries also to be a champion of his causes, which are, among others: the war in Iraq democracy in the Middle East open borders with Mexico tax cuts and so on. In becoming a champion of causes, he is creating arguments. He is communicating to sell his point of view. He is acting like a debater, taking a single side of an problem and promoting it, stacking all the evidence to make the sale. He wants to win the war in Iraq, and get the American people on his side in this aim, so he pushes his promoting points at all times, like a great life insurance salesman. He is our cheerleader-in-chief.

The Difficulty

I believe an American president demands to be a diplomat, yes, and a champion of causes, and a cheerleader but he or she demands to be far more than this. Like Ronald Reagan, or John F. Kennedy, or Franklin D. Roosevelt, he also needs to be a communicator.

I bear in mind taking a course on military history when I was a student at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska. The professor, a military man, stated that the American soldier is as opposed to soldiers from totalitarian nations, in a single way at least. In totalitarian nations, the commanders give orders and the soldiers execute them, period. The professor said that you can do this with American soldiers as well, and get the same results. He mentioned, though, that you can get even greater outcomes if you explain to your soldiers the explanation for the orders. What are they fighting for? What is the mission? What are the risks and methods to handle them? What is the strategic situation? What are the objectives, signposts, exit methods, and so on?

Bush has completed a miserable job of explaining the circumstance in Iraq. By limiting himself to the roles of diplomat and cheerleader-in-chief, he has failed to engage the American public in this important war work.

Lessons of the Memorandum

1st, I believe that the New York Occasions has done it again—come close to becoming treasonous in a time of war, revealing secret conversations about an concern of national safety.

On the other hand, I don’t care. I’m glad the memorandum got out. It ultimately shows me what I’ve suspected all along—that there is sophisticated considering going on about the Iraq war in the Bush administration. Bush’s massive blunder, in my opinion, is hiding this sort of pondering from the American public. The public is scratching their heads, wondering if they’ve got a moron for a president. I’ve identified that he is a vibrant man in a lot of methods, despite his Bushism’s and his inability to communicate. He has made the most significant error of his presidency, however, in being tight-lipped about the complexities of this war, and about many other issues.

If Bush ever desires the American people to comprehend why we are in Iraq, what to count on, and what will be the sacrifice, he requirements to open up and become also yet another excellent communicator, like Ronald Reagan, JFK, and FDR. I know he, and most in the public, do not think that he has it in him to communicate in this way, but I’ve observed him do it in some of his greatest speeches. He demands to trust the American individuals that they can recognize the complexities he will clarify.

If he ever does this, which I doubt he will—some men and women will start to listen to what he says, trust what he says, and begin to have faith in him once more.

Yes, the American individuals have underestimated George Bush he is no idiot. Winning the American presidency twice, and running the nation for eight years is impossible for an idiot. But George Bush has also underestimated the American folks they are far a lot more mature and sophisticated than he imagines. They can handle the truth. They can realize the complexities.

Commence telling the complete truth, Mr. President. Open up. Lay it out for us, in all its detail and uncertainty. Step out of your roles as diplomat and cheerleader-in-chief at times to become also the fantastic communicator. Your poll numbers will rise, and you may well get the public help for your worldview that you’ve always craved. This way, you can secure your legacy. Plus, this will squash the impact of the moronic left. They will be the ones, then, left with the basic pronouncements with no substance.


Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone

(*Wikipedia [ page:] is usually my source unless indicated.)

Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone


XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

ICON2 Great Building Materials & Designer Supplies
%d bloggers like this: